Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Security Solution] Allow users to edit related_integrations field for custom rules #173595

Closed
12 of 13 tasks
Tracked by #174168
approksiu opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 19 comments · Fixed by #178295
Closed
12 of 13 tasks
Tracked by #174168

[Security Solution] Allow users to edit related_integrations field for custom rules #173595

approksiu opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 19 comments · Fixed by #178295
Assignees
Labels
8.15 candidate enhancement New value added to drive a business result Feature:Rule Creation Security Solution Detection Rule Creation Feature:Rule Edit Team:Detection Rule Management Security Detection Rule Management Team Team:Detections and Resp Security Detection Response Team Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. v8.15.0

Comments

@approksiu
Copy link

approksiu commented Dec 19, 2023

Epics: https://github.com/elastic/security-team/issues/1974 (internal), #174168

Summary

We need to expose the related_integrations field in the rule edit page and allow editing it.
We should provide a list of valid security integrations for the users to choose from.
It is an optional field.

Background

We want to allow users to easily specify the prerequisites for their custom rules.

User story

  • As a user, I want to be able to specify related integrations fields for my custom rules.

Acceptance criteria

  • Rule edit page shows the related_integrations field in the Define Rule section.
  • User can select the related integrations from a list of available security integrations.
  • On the rule edit page, there is a tooltip explaining what this field does, (and a link to documentation?).
  • User can save the rule without this field specified.
  • When user is duplicating a prebuilt rule, the related integration field should be kept.

Designs

Figma file

Release progress

  • Initial implementation is done. (PR)
  • Feature is covered with automated tests.
  • Feature is fully implemented and considered by the development team as ready to be released.
  • Acceptance testing is done and the feature is approved by @approksiu and @ARWNightingale.
  • Exploratory testing is done and the feature is approved by @vgomez-el.
  • Documentation is written for ESS and Serverless by @joepeeples. Three docs PRs are approved and ready to be merged. (ticket)
  • Feature is released in Serverless.

Planned release date in Serverless: Week of May 6, 2024.
Planned release date in ESS: June 18 2024 (v8.15.0).

@approksiu approksiu added the Team:Detection Rule Management Security Detection Rule Management Team label Dec 19, 2023
@approksiu approksiu changed the title [Security Solution] Allow users to edit related_integrations field for rules [Security Solution] Allow users to edit related_integrations field for custom rules Jan 2, 2024
@ARWNightingale ARWNightingale self-assigned this Jan 8, 2024
@jpdjere
Copy link
Contributor

jpdjere commented Jan 11, 2024

The related integrations field has the schema:

    RelatedIntegrationArray:
      type: array
      items:
        $ref: '#/components/schemas/RelatedIntegration'

    RelatedIntegration:
      type: object
      properties:
        package:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/NonEmptyString'
        version:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/NonEmptyString'
        integration:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/NonEmptyString'
      required:
        - package
        - version

for example, for existing rules:

[
  {
    "name": "Linux Restricted Shell Breakout via Linux Binary(s)",
    "ri": [{ "package": "endpoint", "version": "^8.2.0" }]
  },
  {
    "name": "Potential Credential Access via DCSync",
    "ri": [
      { "package": "system", "version": "^1.6.4" },
      { "package": "windows", "version": "^1.5.0" }
    ]
  },
  {
    "name": "Microsoft Build Engine Using an Alternate Name",
    "ri": [
      { "package": "endpoint", "version": "^8.2.0" },
      { "package": "windows", "version": "^1.5.0" }
    ]
  },

  {
    "name": "Unusual AWS Command for a User",
    "ri": [{ "package": "aws", "version": "^2.0.0" }]
  },
  {
    "name": "First Time Seen AWS Secret Value Accessed in Secrets Manager",
    "ri": [
      { "package": "aws", "version": "^2.0.0", "integration": "cloudtrail" }
    ]
  },
  {
    "name": "AWS S3 Bucket Configuration Deletion",
    "ri": [
      { "package": "aws", "version": "^2.0.0", "integration": "cloudtrail" }
    ]
  }
]

Notice that the integration field is optional, and indeed some have it and some not. The integration field supercedes the package field what we show in the UI. For example, for the related integration:

 { "package": "aws", "version": "^2.0.0" }

We link to the page: /app/integrations/detail/aws-2.0.0/overview

while for the integration:

 { "package": "aws", "version": "^2.0.0", "integration": "cloudtrail" }

we link to: /app/integrations/detail/aws-2.0.0/overview?integration=cloudtrail

We can fetch all packages via the Fleet endpoint GET /kbn/api/fleet/epm/packages, and the response looks like:

{
    "items": [
        {
            "name": "aws",
            "title": "AWS",
            "version": "2.11.1",
            "release": "ga",
            "description": "Collect logs and metrics from Amazon Web Services (AWS) with Elastic Agent.",
            "type": "integration",
            "download": "/epr/aws/aws-2.11.1.zip",
            "path": "/package/aws/2.11.1",
            "icons": [
                {
                    "src": "/img/logo_aws.svg",
                    "path": "/package/aws/2.11.1/img/logo_aws.svg",
                    "title": "logo aws",
                    "size": "32x32",
                    "type": "image/svg+xml"
                }
            ],
            "policy_templates": [
                // more ingration policies
                {
                    "name": "cloudtrail",
                    "title": "AWS CloudTrail",
                    "description": "Collect AWS CloudTrail logs with Elastic Agent",
                    "icons": [
                        {
                            "src": "/img/logo_cloudtrail.svg",
                            "path": "/package/aws/2.11.1/img/logo_cloudtrail.svg",
                            "title": "AWS Cloudtrail logo",
                            "size": "32x32",
                            "type": "image/svg+xml"
                        }
                    ],
                    "categories": [
                        "security"
                    ]
                },
                {
                    "name": "cloudwatch",
                    "title": "AWS CloudWatch",
                    "description": "Use this integration to collect logs and metrics from Amazon CloudWatch with Elastic Agent, where no out of the box integration is available.",
                    "icons": [
                        {
                            "src": "/img/logo_cloudwatch.svg",
                            "path": "/package/aws/2.11.1/img/logo_cloudwatch.svg",
                            "title": "AWS CloudWatch logo",
                            "size": "32x32",
                            "type": "image/svg+xml"
                        }
                    ],
                    "categories": [
                        "observability",
                        "monitoring"
                    ]
                },
                // more ingration policies
            ],
            "conditions": {
                "kibana": {
                    "version": "^8.10.2"
                },
                "elastic": {
                    "subscription": "basic"
                }
            },
            "owner": {
                "type": "elastic",
                "github": "elastic/obs-ds-hosted-services"
            },
            "categories": [
                "aws"
            ],
            "signature_path": "/epr/aws/aws-2.11.1.zip.sig",
            "id": "aws",
            "status": "not_installed"
        },
        // more integration packages
        {
            "name": "windows",
            "title": "Windows",
            "version": "1.43.0",
            "release": "ga",
            "description": "Collect logs and metrics from Windows OS and services with Elastic Agent.",
            "type": "integration",
            "download": "/epr/windows/windows-1.43.0.zip",
            "path": "/package/windows/1.43.0",
            "icons": [
                {
                    "src": "/img/logo_windows.svg",
                    "path": "/package/windows/1.43.0/img/logo_windows.svg",
                    "title": "logo windows",
                    "size": "32x32",
                    "type": "image/svg+xml"
                }
            ],
            "policy_templates": [
                {
                    "name": "windows",
                    "title": "Windows logs and metrics",
                    "description": "Collect logs and metrics from Windows instances"
                }
            ],
            "conditions": {
                "kibana": {
                    "version": "^8.8.0"
                }
            },
            "owner": {
                "github": "elastic/elastic-agent-data-plane"
            },
            "categories": [
                "os_system",
                "security"
            ],
            "signature_path": "/epr/windows/windows-1.43.0.zip.sig",
            "id": "windows",
            "status": "not_installed"
        },
        
    ]
}

So:

  • the top level objects correspond to packages, which have info that we might need such as version and description.
  • each of those packages has a policy_templates array whose elements correspond to integrations in our schema. For example, AWS Cloudtrail.

Open questions:

  • How should the editing component for this field look like?
  • How do we handle the version? Do we just automatically select the previous minor version, major version? Do we allow the user to type in what they want? (This is important for the Related Integration component, where we show if the installation is installed or not)

@approksiu
Copy link
Author

For installed integrations - select current version, for non-installed - latest version.
Do we show installed and non-installed integrations, and do we show only security category or others too?

@approksiu
Copy link
Author

Consider showing packages and integrations in the "flat" drop-down.

@approksiu
Copy link
Author

approksiu commented Jan 18, 2024

Do we show installed and non-installed integrations, and do we show only security category or others too?

We should show all security integrations. Would be nice to indicate which ones are installed/not installed - maybe as a follow up? cc @ARWNightingale
It should be possible to search by name

@jpdjere
Copy link
Contributor

jpdjere commented Jan 18, 2024

Great @approksiu .

So we just met with @ARWNightingale and discussed this.

I think it makes sense to give the user a dropdown of all possible related integrations, pulling the list from Fleet. At the same time, we should show the user which of those integrations are installed, with some kind of label on each integration's row, if it is actually installed. Maybe Alex you can think an example of how this should look like.

Also, integrations that are installed should be pushed up to the top of the list, because we can presume that the user will be selecting one of those with much higher probability.

Makes sense to you @approksiu ?

@approksiu
Copy link
Author

@jpdjere totally, thanks!

@banderror banderror added enhancement New value added to drive a business result Team:Detections and Resp Security Detection Response Team Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. Feature:Rule Creation Security Solution Detection Rule Creation 8.14 candidate labels Mar 7, 2024
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/security-detections-response (Team:Detections and Resp)

@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/security-solution (Team: SecuritySolution)

@approksiu
Copy link
Author

@maximpn my preference is Design 2 option from the figma file. Let's pre-fill version value if possible for the user to accept or modify. Thanks!

@maximpn
Copy link
Contributor

maximpn commented Mar 26, 2024

@approksiu thank you for an update 👍

I attach the current Design 2 Figma snapshot for quick reference:

image

@banderror
Copy link
Contributor

@maximpn Since #178295 has been approved by reviewers (I'd like to take a look, but it shouldn't block the work on the ticket), I think we should notify the stakeholders that work on acceptance testing, exploratory testing, and documentation can start.

Once you have the PR deployed to Cloud for testing, please ping @approksiu, @ARWNightingale, and @vgomez-el in this thread and share credentials with them.

Please also open a documentation ticket for related_integrations similar to elastic/security-docs#4917 and elastic/security-docs#5029 and ping @joepeeples here in this thread.

It would be great if you could also try to align with the stakeholders on timing and plan a release date in Serverless.

@maximpn
Copy link
Contributor

maximpn commented Apr 18, 2024

@approksiu, @ARWNightingale, and @vgomez-el could you perform testing of #178295?

@banderror there is a problem with automatic cloud deploy via tags. I had to use another approach to deploy my PR. It's only possible to deploy in ESS env atm.

UPDATE: Serverless cloud deploy works well. I updated the information above.

UPDATE 2: It seems Serverless cloud deploy stoped working.

@approksiu
Copy link
Author

Great work Maxim, looks good to me!

@ARWNightingale
Copy link

Looks good to me!!
Just a note for future enhancements maybe we should look at disabling the add + option when we have an empty input so the user can not add more than 1 empty inputs, but this is across all similar interactions elsewhere too.

@vgomez-el
Copy link

@approksiu @banderror According to the issue title, user Story and @maximpn's PR description, I understand that this feature is only available for custom rules, but If I select another rule type rather than Custom rules, the related integrations option is displayed as well:
New Terms:
image
Indicator Match:
image
ES|QL:
image

Is that intended? In case it is, it should be reflected on any of the existing issues, because the current issues description can lead to confusion.

@maximpn
Copy link
Contributor

maximpn commented Apr 29, 2024

Hi @vgomez-el!

Sorry for the confusion. Custom rules mean NOT Prebuilt rules since it's a prerequisite for Milestone 3 prebuilt rules customization. It's applicable to all rule types. Word custom is to only highlight we don't touch prebuilt rules.

@vgomez-el
Copy link

vgomez-el commented Apr 30, 2024

Sorry for not understanding it correctly, @maximpn. I have performed exploratory testing on your environment and the feature looks nice to me. I will perform the Kibana Upgrade scenarios and the CCS scenarios once I have the first build candidate of the 8.15 version. Please, Ping me if someone needs more details on the exploratory testing performed.

@joepeeples
Copy link
Contributor

@maximpn and all, a docs PR is now open for serverless docs: https://github.com/elastic/staging-serverless-security-docs/pull/337

maximpn added a commit that referenced this issue May 2, 2024
…r custom rules (#178295)

**Resolves: #173595

## Summary

This PR adds an ability to add and edit custom rule's related integrations. Functionality is necessary to start working on [Prebuilt Rule Customization Epic Milestone 3](#174168).

## Details

Rule's related integrations represent optional dependencies on [Elastic integrations](https://docs.elastic.co/en/integrations) to ingest data. Currently prebuilt rule's related integrations are shown on rule details page. This information contains integration's name, installation status and a version mismatch warning when related integration's version dependency doesn't match with an installed integration's version. A subset of [Semver](https://semver.org/) is used to specify version dependency. Elastic prebuilt rules use only caret syntax like `^1.2.3`.

To make it possible to add and edit related integrations for custom rules the following has been done

- New internal endpoint `/internal/detection_engine/fleet/integrations/all` has been added. It returns the full list of available integrations containing title, latest available version and installed version if available. This is necessary to display an options list where users can pick a desired integration. Since some Elastic Prebuilt rules depend not only on integrations from `security` category this endpoint returns all available integrations (not only related to Security Solution).
- Rule create form has been adjusted by adding `Related Integrations` form controls
- Rule edit form has been adjusted by adding `Related Integrations` form controls
- Related integrations installation status has been adjusted to conform with the design
- Functional Jest tests have been added
- Functional tests have been added to make sure it's possible to (bulk) `create`/`patch`/`update`/`export`/`import` with related integrations
- A limited number of Cypress tests have been added

### Integration installation status

Integration installation status has been adjusted. There are following statuses shown

- `Enabled` for installed and enabled integrations. Enabled integrations are detected by checking Elastic Agent policies for presence of such an integration. It's not guaranteed the policy is picked by agents and data is being ingested.
- `Disabled` for installed and disabled integrations. An agent policy containing such an integration isn't found.
- `Not installed` for  not installed integrations.
- Nothing is shown for unknown integrations. If there is no such integration found in `/internal/detection_engine/fleet/integrations/all` result it's considered as unknown.

### Version dependency

[Semver](https://semver.org/) allows a wide range of version range declaration. Such flexibility will complicate constructing of an integration link on rule details page. Since Elastic Prebuilt rules use only caret version dependency like `^1.2.3` related integration's version dependency is limited to a subset of semver semantic. The following is supported

- A plain version dependency e.g. `1.2.3`
- Tilde version dependency  e.g. `~1.2.3`
- Caret version dependency e.g. `^1.2.3`

### Misc

- #152408 has been fixed by this PR.
- `/internal/detection_engine/fleet/integrations/installed` endpoint hasn't been removed. We need to make sure it's not needed anymore.
- E2e testing of the current functionality is complicated by dependency on EPR and difficulties to mock it. EPR periodically may respond with an error resulting in flaky Cypress tests.

### Flaky test runner results

- 🟢  [Create rule](https://buildkite.com/elastic/kibana-flaky-test-suite-runner/builds/5632) (100 runs ESS and 100 runs in Serverless)
- 🟢  [Rule Management related integrations](https://buildkite.com/elastic/kibana-flaky-test-suite-runner/builds/5632) (100 runs ESS and 100 runs in Serverless)

### Screenshots

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 01 25](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/f41574cb-c806-4e49-97bf-9b27bf4c0f39)

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 02 03](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/cf15580e-169f-4823-a579-257509c806a4)

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 02 16](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/03a21eea-1014-484f-b1d2-3db81c46b8ef)

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 04 19](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/06385ef4-458f-4562-bb8f-d98db9bb1fe3)

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 02 33](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/edec85bf-d020-4afb-a999-4eb21255c3b6)

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 04 40](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/a21c55a8-9947-44b0-ba1f-6624cd410d3e)

![Screenshot 2024-04-16 at 10 05 03](https://github.com/elastic/kibana/assets/3775283/05928a15-961b-4f67-9968-d2a32ceb86dc)
@maximpn maximpn reopened this May 2, 2024
@banderror
Copy link
Contributor

The feature went live in Serverless today 🚀 Thanks to everyone for your efforts!

banderror added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 26, 2024
…ed integrations and required fields from the original rule (#191065)

**Fixes: #190628
**Related to:** #173595,
#173594

## Summary

As stated in the bug ticket, when duplicating a prebuilt rule, the
"Related Integrations" and "Required Fields" values should be inherited
from the original rule, as it was specified in the Acceptance Criteria
for #173595 and
#173594.

This PR:

- Removes the logic that resets these fields to empty arrays for
duplicated prebuilt rules - we needed this logic in the past because
these fields were not editable in the UI, but we don't need it anymore.
- Updates the corresponding unit tests.

## Screenshots

These screenshots were taken after introducing the fixes.

**Original prebuilt rule:**

<img width="1463" alt="Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_07"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ad8673f5-aba3-40c8-ae91-bbd7d334b119">

**Duplicated prebuilt rule:**

<img width="1469" alt="Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_43"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/03761a2b-6f53-4bab-bf4c-a71c6860802b">

### Checklist

- [ ]
[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)
was added for features that require explanation or tutorials
- [x] [Unit or functional
tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)
were updated or added to match the most common scenarios
banderror added a commit to banderror/kibana that referenced this issue Aug 27, 2024
…ed integrations and required fields from the original rule (elastic#191065)

**Fixes: elastic#190628
**Related to:** elastic#173595,
elastic#173594

## Summary

As stated in the bug ticket, when duplicating a prebuilt rule, the
"Related Integrations" and "Required Fields" values should be inherited
from the original rule, as it was specified in the Acceptance Criteria
for elastic#173595 and
elastic#173594.

This PR:

- Removes the logic that resets these fields to empty arrays for
duplicated prebuilt rules - we needed this logic in the past because
these fields were not editable in the UI, but we don't need it anymore.
- Updates the corresponding unit tests.

## Screenshots

These screenshots were taken after introducing the fixes.

**Original prebuilt rule:**

<img width="1463" alt="Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_07"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ad8673f5-aba3-40c8-ae91-bbd7d334b119">

**Duplicated prebuilt rule:**

<img width="1469" alt="Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_43"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/03761a2b-6f53-4bab-bf4c-a71c6860802b">

### Checklist

- [ ]
[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)
was added for features that require explanation or tutorials
- [x] [Unit or functional
tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)
were updated or added to match the most common scenarios

(cherry picked from commit b144c05)

# Conflicts:
#	x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/lib/detection_engine/rule_management/logic/actions/duplicate_rule.test.ts
#	x-pack/plugins/security_solution/server/lib/detection_engine/rule_management/logic/actions/duplicate_rule.ts
banderror added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 27, 2024
…y related integrations and required fields from the original rule (#191065) (#191493)

# Backport

This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.15`:
- [[Security Solution] Fix prebuilt rule duplication logic to copy
related integrations and required fields from the original rule
(#191065)](#191065)

<!--- Backport version: 8.9.8 -->

### Questions ?
Please refer to the [Backport tool
documentation](https://github.com/sqren/backport)

<!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Georgii
Gorbachev","email":"[email protected]"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2024-08-26T13:42:52Z","message":"[Security
Solution] Fix prebuilt rule duplication logic to copy related
integrations and required fields from the original rule
(#191065)\n\n**Fixes:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/190628**\r\n**Related to:**
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/173595,\r\nhttps://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/173594\r\n\r\n##
Summary\r\n\r\nAs stated in the bug ticket, when duplicating a prebuilt
rule, the\r\n\"Related Integrations\" and \"Required Fields\" values
should be inherited\r\nfrom the original rule, as it was specified in
the Acceptance Criteria\r\nfor
#173595
and\r\nhttps://github.com//issues/173594.\r\n\r\nThis
PR:\r\n\r\n- Removes the logic that resets these fields to empty arrays
for\r\nduplicated prebuilt rules - we needed this logic in the past
because\r\nthese fields were not editable in the UI, but we don't need
it anymore.\r\n- Updates the corresponding unit tests.\r\n\r\n##
Screenshots\r\n\r\nThese screenshots were taken after introducing the
fixes.\r\n\r\n**Original prebuilt rule:**\r\n\r\n<img width=\"1463\"
alt=\"Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_07\"\r\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ad8673f5-aba3-40c8-ae91-bbd7d334b119\">\r\n\r\n**Duplicated
prebuilt rule:**\r\n\r\n<img width=\"1469\"
alt=\"Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_43\"\r\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/03761a2b-6f53-4bab-bf4c-a71c6860802b\">\r\n\r\n###
Checklist\r\n\r\n- [
]\r\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\r\nwas
added for features that require explanation or tutorials\r\n- [x] [Unit
or
functional\r\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\r\nwere
updated or added to match the most common
scenarios","sha":"b144c05e8f39f28dd9551b7c62daa01cfa1d2cd5","branchLabelMapping":{"^v8.16.0$":"main","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["bug","release_note:fix","impact:medium","Team:Detections
and Resp","Team: SecuritySolution","Feature:Rule
Management","Team:Detection Rule Management","Feature:Prebuilt Detection
Rules","v8.16.0","v8.15.1"],"number":191065,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/191065","mergeCommit":{"message":"[Security
Solution] Fix prebuilt rule duplication logic to copy related
integrations and required fields from the original rule
(#191065)\n\n**Fixes:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/190628**\r\n**Related to:**
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/173595,\r\nhttps://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/173594\r\n\r\n##
Summary\r\n\r\nAs stated in the bug ticket, when duplicating a prebuilt
rule, the\r\n\"Related Integrations\" and \"Required Fields\" values
should be inherited\r\nfrom the original rule, as it was specified in
the Acceptance Criteria\r\nfor
#173595
and\r\nhttps://github.com//issues/173594.\r\n\r\nThis
PR:\r\n\r\n- Removes the logic that resets these fields to empty arrays
for\r\nduplicated prebuilt rules - we needed this logic in the past
because\r\nthese fields were not editable in the UI, but we don't need
it anymore.\r\n- Updates the corresponding unit tests.\r\n\r\n##
Screenshots\r\n\r\nThese screenshots were taken after introducing the
fixes.\r\n\r\n**Original prebuilt rule:**\r\n\r\n<img width=\"1463\"
alt=\"Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_07\"\r\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ad8673f5-aba3-40c8-ae91-bbd7d334b119\">\r\n\r\n**Duplicated
prebuilt rule:**\r\n\r\n<img width=\"1469\"
alt=\"Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_43\"\r\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/03761a2b-6f53-4bab-bf4c-a71c6860802b\">\r\n\r\n###
Checklist\r\n\r\n- [
]\r\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\r\nwas
added for features that require explanation or tutorials\r\n- [x] [Unit
or
functional\r\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\r\nwere
updated or added to match the most common
scenarios","sha":"b144c05e8f39f28dd9551b7c62daa01cfa1d2cd5"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["8.15"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v8.16.0","labelRegex":"^v8.16.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/191065","number":191065,"mergeCommit":{"message":"[Security
Solution] Fix prebuilt rule duplication logic to copy related
integrations and required fields from the original rule
(#191065)\n\n**Fixes:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/190628**\r\n**Related to:**
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/173595,\r\nhttps://github.com/elastic/kibana/issues/173594\r\n\r\n##
Summary\r\n\r\nAs stated in the bug ticket, when duplicating a prebuilt
rule, the\r\n\"Related Integrations\" and \"Required Fields\" values
should be inherited\r\nfrom the original rule, as it was specified in
the Acceptance Criteria\r\nfor
#173595
and\r\nhttps://github.com//issues/173594.\r\n\r\nThis
PR:\r\n\r\n- Removes the logic that resets these fields to empty arrays
for\r\nduplicated prebuilt rules - we needed this logic in the past
because\r\nthese fields were not editable in the UI, but we don't need
it anymore.\r\n- Updates the corresponding unit tests.\r\n\r\n##
Screenshots\r\n\r\nThese screenshots were taken after introducing the
fixes.\r\n\r\n**Original prebuilt rule:**\r\n\r\n<img width=\"1463\"
alt=\"Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_07\"\r\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ad8673f5-aba3-40c8-ae91-bbd7d334b119\">\r\n\r\n**Duplicated
prebuilt rule:**\r\n\r\n<img width=\"1469\"
alt=\"Screenshot_2024-08-23_at_13_25_43\"\r\nsrc=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/03761a2b-6f53-4bab-bf4c-a71c6860802b\">\r\n\r\n###
Checklist\r\n\r\n- [
]\r\n[Documentation](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-documentation.html)\r\nwas
added for features that require explanation or tutorials\r\n- [x] [Unit
or
functional\r\ntests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html)\r\nwere
updated or added to match the most common
scenarios","sha":"b144c05e8f39f28dd9551b7c62daa01cfa1d2cd5"}},{"branch":"8.15","label":"v8.15.1","labelRegex":"^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}]
BACKPORT-->
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
8.15 candidate enhancement New value added to drive a business result Feature:Rule Creation Security Solution Detection Rule Creation Feature:Rule Edit Team:Detection Rule Management Security Detection Rule Management Team Team:Detections and Resp Security Detection Response Team Team: SecuritySolution Security Solutions Team working on SIEM, Endpoint, Timeline, Resolver, etc. v8.15.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

8 participants